I see Douchebag Don and it makes me wonder if I can start calling Clinton and Sanders names, too.
How about that old bitty Hillary, or Hillary the Hag, or that bitch Hillary, or Sanders the old bastid or Blind Bernie or ...
Seems fair to me, but I won't cuz its pretty repulsive, across the board. But its what you guys do.
Carry on.
Ummm, yea-aah...
Kurtster, what do you think Trump has been doing FOR YEARS to people he's decided to dislike?
Do you not remember all the crap and names he's spewed out recently? Little Marco. Lyin' Ted. Jeb's got low energy. Who would vote for a woman who had a face like Carly Fiorina. Crooked Hillary. Crazy Bernie.
Trump was the one who raced downwards to get to the sewer. This is no longer an election. It's a semi-reality-based Freak Show.
And people are not supposed to come up with names for Trump? Somehow everyone else shouldn't stoop to Don's level?
BTW, the entire GOP has been assassinating Hillary Clinton's character for DECADES. All the rumors that Hillary had Vince Foster murdered, that she was a closet lesbian, that she and Bill were trying to cover up felonies related to Whitewater, that she was directly responsible for Benghazi... blah blah blah.
But Trump? Trump can lie, contradict himself, get outraged when the Washington Post CORRECTLY noted that he hadn't turned over donations to Vietnam vet charities, display a total lack of understanding about current events, repeatedly behave like a world-class jackass but doesn't drop that much in the polls only because people are entertained by his buffoonery.
Trump reminds me of Charlie Sheen, when Charlie was tweeting "Winning!" and behaving like he was king of the world. Oh, but gee: Charlie had AIDS, had put women at risk of getting AIDS and was doling out huge sums to keep blackmailers quiet. He'd also become radioactive in Hollywood. Not exactly winning, was he?
Trump is the same buffoon, waiting for a comeuppance.
Come up with all the names you want. We're already in the sewer. Hillary's already been smeared over and over. It's time for Trump's bullshit to catch up with him.
So it's okay for a presidential contender to say Lyin' Ted, Little (dick) Mario, Crooked Hillary etc etc. but you're holding us to a higher standard? That's pretty much the definition of bass-ackward.
I'm speaking about us here at RP. I guess you can use any excuses you want.
C'ya
Then I misunderstand. We're talking about Trump, not each other, and how it's not right that he's insulting and using schoolyard insults while he wants to be President of the United States.
Here's the link to the video for those of you that want to watch him say Lyin' Ted, etc. This is NOT Presidential behavior, at least in the America that wants to be great again.
I'm speaking about us here at RP. I guess you can use any excuses you want.
C'ya
So it's okay for a presidential contender to say Lyin' Ted, Little (dick) Mario, Crooked Hillary etc etc. but you're holding us to a higher standard? That's pretty much the definition of bass-ackward.
Anyone who by now doesn't realize that Drumph is dangerously unqualified is every bit as scary as he is. This is, itself, the real problem. Not Drumph, but the number of people in this country who actually believe he's a viable candidate for the White House.
I wondered for 7 years where the vehement anger against Obama would go when he's gone, and it looks like it's lining up with the Trump supporters. Again, looking to the future, what happens when he's not elected?
Especially if he continues his habit of saying things like "it's rigged" or insulting people around him who take him to task... What will that do to our nation? Are we doomed for another 4-8 years of gridlock while the rest of the world moves on?
Aside, to say something about 'Merica - I just spent a brief period in France and London and noticed that there was no place where I could say that we do it better in the States.
Trains were fully automated and came every 3-4 minutes, so I never needed to run to catch one. Just wait 3 minutes and the next one shows. I could always use Apple Pay to check out - or a Contactless Visa, if I'd ever heard of them before. Why don't we have them in the States? And the French are perturbed right now about a possible 35 hr work week instead of their 30 hr one. Some of my favorite restaurants there opened at 7pm and closed at midnight, which was fantastically comfortable.
We are plenty behind, even though we keep hearing we're the greatest.
In fact, I began to think we're just living in North Korea, cut off from the reality of our ineptitude by our government and media. Of course, I don't think electing Trump (or even Hillary) will make it any better.
Anyone who by now doesn't realize that Drumph is dangerously unqualified is every bit as scary as he is. This is, itself, the real problem. Not Drumph, but the number of people in this country who actually believe he's a viable candidate for the White House.
Anyone who by now doesn't realize that Drumph is dangerously unqualified is every bit as scary as he is. This is, itself, the real problem. Not Drumph, but the number of people in this country who actually believe he's a viable candidate for the White House.
I don't see Trump's substantive qualifications. I'm not anti-GOP, either. Would've voted without hesitation for Huntsman over Obama. He's qualified. It's just that - without being comparative to Hillary or Cruz - Trump's not fit to be President for the same reason Jesse Jackson or Ralph Nader aren't.
If Trump was really the right man for the job, he'd have some accolades instead of promises. Lastly, Obama's bar - regardless of how low you'd consider it - wasn't lying on the ground at zero. He'd done a few things.
Trying to wean myself off of this thread but...
Douchebag Don is making up promises and "policies" as he goes along. People accused John McCain of shooting from the hip, but Trump is totally unprepared and winging it (wasn't that you, Steely_D, who came up with that description?).
Obama did not have a lot of experience as an elected politician but he had an army of experienced advisors behind him. I know some here loathe him but I think he's been a very good president. Even if you just skim these two articles
you realize that he accomplished a great deal in the face of harsh opposition and, at the beginning of his administration, one of the worst economic crises this country has ever faced.
Finally, as I've said before: Trump has spent his whole life promoting himself and trying to maximize his own return from investments. It's always been All About Don.
According to Segal and other social-justice advocates who keep tabs on racist groups and hate speech, the jingoism of Trump's presidential campaign has fueled this sort of harassment. Trump's xenophobic and Islamophobic rhetoric and policy proposals have resonated with the rebellious, belligerent, flag-waving alt-right.
No it is the real question because everyone (the royal we) is acting like the ones they like and don't like are the perfect or the worst possible choice in the broadest terms as used in discussions.
No, not you because you state Hillary is acceptable, although not the best we could do ... Is Trump a good Presidential choice? No. There are also a lot of people who feel the opposite of you and are just as calm about it as you are.
They are no more crazy than you are either.
. edit: That said, with the election of Obama, we certainly lowered the bar for how much and what kind of actual experience is needed to be POTUS. Trying to raise standards for Obama's successor doesn't say much good for Obama and kind of leaves him with an * by his record.
I don't see Trump's substantive qualifications. I'm not anti-GOP, either. Would've voted without hesitation for Huntsman over Obama. He's qualified. It's just that - without being comparative to Hillary or Cruz - Trump's not fit to be President for the same reason Jesse Jackson or Ralph Nader aren't.
If Trump was really the right man for the job, he'd have some accolades instead of promises. Lastly, Obama's bar - regardless of how low you'd consider it - wasn't lying on the ground at zero. He'd done a few things.
I think that's a distracting question, trying to get folks to settle. The real questions involve competency, which includes a knowledge of how the government gets things done, as well as an ability to work within those boundaries. As we saw with Obama, if Congress isn't wanting to do what you think needs doing, you're going to have a hard time of it.
So back to the primary issue:Hillary is acceptable, although not the best we could do. If there is someone better, can they fight their way through the process? Is Trump a good Presidential choice? No.
No it is the real question because everyone (the royal we) is acting like the ones they like and don't like are the perfect or the worst possible choice in the broadest terms as used in discussions.
No, not you because you state Hillary is acceptable, although not the best we could do ... Is Trump a good Presidential choice? No. There are also a lot of people who feel the opposite of you and are just as calm about it as you are.
They are no more crazy than you are either.
. edit: That said, with the election of Obama, we certainly lowered the bar for how much and what kind of actual experience is needed to be POTUS. Trying to raise standards for Obama's successor doesn't say much good for Obama and kind of leaves him with an * by his record.
So who is out there that can make all of us happy all of the time ?
I think that's a distracting question, trying to get folks to settle. The real questions involve competency, which includes a knowledge of how the government gets things done, as well as an ability to work within those boundaries. As we saw with Obama, if Congress isn't wanting to do what you think needs doing, you're going to have a hard time of it.
Do we really want to elect someone who is fighting Congress again? Four or eight more years of obstructionism?
So back to the primary issue:Hillary is acceptable, although not the best we could do. If there is someone better, can they fight their way through the process? Is Trump a good Presidential choice? No.
I think the "bully" part is what's making him so attractive to the folks that support him. They seem to think that a man who "tells it like it is" and who rejects "political correctness" (which is somehow different than manners and politeness) is the kind of guy who can lead the country out of its failure. I think "failure" is a placeholder for "multi-ethnicity."
So, hiring a bully white man who says that those foreigners are the problem - that's the selling point. Of course, when the foreigners leave, who has to get off their ass and build the better nation?
When contrasted with Ms Clinton, there is a clear choice between the two. And so with Sanders. Right now those are the electable choices. Shortly it narrows down to 2.
All of us are faced with the same choices. Pick one of the two electable choices or vote for a 3rd party and try to get the House to pick our next POTUS, which if it goes to the House can be anybody, including someone we do not even know at present.
Is what it is. We all have to deal with it and live with the result. All of us.
So who is out there that can make all of us happy all of the time ?
